Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 77

Thread: Ammunition serialization bill (HB 3359)

  1. #1
    Regular Member John Hardin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Snohomish, Washington, USA
    Posts
    684

    Post imported post

    Well, hell. I thought I could trust Rep. Al O'Brien. Now he goes and sponsors this stupidity:

    http://apps.leg.wa.gov/documents/bil...Bills/3359.pdf

    Here's what I've written to him:

    Rep. O'Brien:

    I am writing you to say I was extremely dismayed to hear today that you had cosponsored an ammunition serialization bill this year.

    You have portrayed yourself to me in the past as a defender of firearms rights. Supporting - worse yet, sponsoring - legislation of this nature, which will do little to reduce or assist in the investigation of violent crime, yet which greatly increases the cost and burden of lawfully manufacturing and dealing in ammunition and owning and using a firearm, is not what I would expect from someone professing to be a defender of firearms rights.

    The manufacture of serialized ammunition as required by this bill - where the serial number on the bullet and the shell casing must match, and all the serial numbers in a given box of ammunition must match - is an extremely expensive proposition, if it is even possible. Ammunition is a bulk commodity produced on high-speed automated machinery by the billions of rounds at low profit margins, not expensive, low-volume, high-profit-margin hand-assembled durable goods.

    The ammunition manufacturing trade association NSSF has stated that serialization of ammunition is not practically feasible; requiring serialized ammunition is, essentially, an ammunition ban. Has anyone actually proven to you that it is even possible in practice (versus in the laboratory) to serialize ammunition in the manner you propose?

    But let us assume for the sake of argument that it is possible...

    Requiring ammunition be serialized will force major (read "expensive") changes in the manufacturing process - essentially, the scrapping and replacement of all existing commercial ammunition production equipment - and will force law-abiding firearm owners to spend even more money to arm themselves in their own defense, while creating a black market in unserialized ammunition for criminal use.

    I see no limitation on the range of calibers that must be serialized. Do you intend that extremely inexpensive small calibers (.22LR, .17HMR) be serialized? That requirement could easily triple the cost of such popular ammunition due to the difficulty of serializing such small ammunition that is produced in such huge quantities.

    Ammunition manufacturers will likely decide that the significant costs of serializing their product to comply with Washington law outweigh the market benefit from selling ammunition in Washington, and will simply stop selling ammunition in Washington. Again, the burden from this would fall primarily, if not solely, on law-abiding firearm owners. If such comes to pass, would you also criminalize a firearm owner going out-of-state to purchase ammunition that was no longer available in-state because it was not serialized?

    I see no exception for hand-loaded ammunition. How would a firearm owner who reloads their own ammunition (as I do, to save money on practice ammunition) comply with this law? Do you simply wish to make it effectively illegal for individual citizens to save money by reloading their own ammunition? Doing so will actually reduce overall safety, as firearm owners will be less able to afford the regular practice that improves safe handling and safe, accurate shooting.

    What of the many firearm owners who cast their own bullets? Do you wish to effectively ban that practice as well?

    Would a private owner of ammunition be required to demand photo ID and report to the state whom he had sold some of his ammunition to, should he wish to dispose of ammunition he no longer wanted?

    Another problem with serialization of ammunition is the ease with which the investigation of a crime could be interfered with. A criminal planning a firearm crime need only go to a shooting range and collect the expended brass from other shooters, then scatter it about the scene of their crime. Again, only law-abiding firearm owners suffer - now they will need to collect and destroy (if they cannot legally reload) all their brass or risk being investigated for a violent crime they did not commit.

    Representative O'Brien, you told me you were a defender of firearms rights, and that you would work for me and my rights in Olympia. I trusted you to live up to that claim. I am sorry to put it in such strong terms, but I cannot see this bill as anything less than a cold betrayal of that trust.

    Please withdraw this bill, or at the very least, remove your sponsorship and work to see it does not pass.

    Thank you.
    It seems this is the new nationwide Gun Control tactic.

    Related:

    http://www.nssf.org/legal/links/alerts/Mississippi.cfm


  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Everett, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,339

    Post imported post

    un-freakin-believable. I can't believe they introduce such an isanely stupid and pathetic bill.
    "A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity."

    "though I walk through the valley in the shadow of death, I fear no evil, for I know that you are by my side" Glock 23:40

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Spokane, WA, ,
    Posts
    639

    Post imported post

    some ammo is expensive enough as it is! I'm glad I reload. Time to stock up on mass quantities of brass and bullets. This is getting absolutely ridiculous.

  4. #4
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Olympia, WA, ,
    Posts
    3,201

    Post imported post


    YARGH!!!!!

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Bellingham, ,
    Posts
    608

    Post imported post

    did i glance at that right?.. you'd get in trouble for destroying the code?

    better stop shooting at hard targets...

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Bellingham, ,
    Posts
    608

    Post imported post

    arn't police an miliary budgets already strained enough? I see another cigarette tax in the future.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Everett, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,339

    Post imported post

    uncoolperson wrote:
    did i glance at that right?.. you'd get in trouble for destroying the code?

    better stop shooting at hard targets...
    For intentionally destroying it. Like if you took the round apart and ground down the numbers. Not for shooting it. It is not your fault if the number does not stand up to normal use of the round.
    "A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity."

    "though I walk through the valley in the shadow of death, I fear no evil, for I know that you are by my side" Glock 23:40

  8. #8
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Olympia, WA, ,
    Posts
    3,201

    Post imported post

    Rep Williams is in my district:X I telephoned him and wrote him concerning this hideous bill.

    This bill places an undue burden on law abiding gun owners and law enforcement. Ammunition is a high production low profit product. This absurd notion of placing a serial number on every case and bullet, as well as packaging will place an undue financial burden on every lawful user of handgun ammo, and will create a black market in unmarked ammo.

    The state constitution clearly states that the right to bear arms for personal defense and defense of the state shall not be impaired. This is a huge impairment on that right. This will not stop crime, but will cause severe economic harm to manufacturers of ammo, as well placing a crippling burden on decent law abiding citizens and law enforcement who purchase this ammo. I strongly urge you to not support this bill any further and allow it to die the unnatural death that it so deserves. I would appreciate a response on this issue.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Moscow, ID
    Posts
    384

    Post imported post

    This is getting ridiculous, folks. I am not at all kidding when I spend an hour a day anymore writing my representatives and telling them to not support these **** bills.

    Every day there are more of them, too.

    WTF.


  10. #10
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Olympia, WA, ,
    Posts
    3,201

    Post imported post

    We need to work on organizing a LARGE group to demonstrate at the Capitol. Probably too late for this year, but next year there HAS to be a demonstration. This is getting insane. As a voting bloc we are not to be trifled with. Heck, I've been told the ATV crowd has successfully cowed the Legislature, if they can do it, we can.

  11. #11
    Regular Member TechnoWeenie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    2,086

    Post imported post

    So uhh... how are law enforcement agencies supposed to comply with this? Do they realize they'll wipe out a few budgets with this new 'requirement'....??

    Or, they can exempt police departments from that requirement, which would mean any bullet found in a dead body WITHOUT a marking means the police must have done it!:celebrate

    lol
    Evangelical lessons are provided upon request. Anyone wishing to meet Jesus can just kick in my door.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Seattle-ish, Washington, USA
    Posts
    222

    Post imported post

    What an insane bill -- more feel-good legislation for the election year! The liberal gun-grabbers don't seem to realize that criminals steal guns, so they can steal ammo, too. Do they really think the gang-bangers walk into WalMart and buy ammo? It comes from all over, and much of it through strawman purchases. I can just see them running serial numbers from a drive-by and finding ten different numbers from ten different boxes of ammo.

    Realistically, this probably won't go anywhere because the fiscal note from DOL will be in the millions of dollars. It seems like any legislation this year with large fiscal notes will stall, but we still need to educate legislators how stupid this is.

    More letters to write . . .



  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Silverdale, Washington, USA
    Posts
    58

    Post imported post

    so I guess we all go to Oregan or Idaho to buy ammo now. Just how big do these idiots think a bullet is to hold non repeating alpha numeric numbers....pretty soon we will all have to have 20mm pistols just so the number will fit.



    Do we pay these idiots for their time thinking up asinine things like this?

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    134

    Post imported post

    This won't go anywhere. Greguire cannot afford to piss off gun owners by signing such non-sense. Frankly, I wish it would pass, as it would be the death kneel for Queen Christine, and Dino Rossi would thenmake sure it was repealed before it came to be in effect.

  15. #15
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    TechnoWeenie wrote:
    So uhh... how are law enforcement agencies supposed to comply with this? Do they realize they'll wipe out a few budgets with this new 'requirement'....??

    Oh, I don't know. Low budgets might be kinda entertaining.

    http://tinyurl.com/2at5aj

    (+5 points if you can stand watching it all the way to the end. )

    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  16. #16
    Regular Member Ajetpilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Olalla, Kitsap County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,410

    Post imported post

    Couldn't finish it.

  17. #17
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Olympia, WA, ,
    Posts
    3,201

    Post imported post

    Ajetpilot wrote:
    Couldn't finish it.
    Chicken:P My brain hurts after that one...

  18. #18
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Olympia, WA, ,
    Posts
    3,201

    Post imported post

    Didn't there used to be some sort of ammo registration requirments with one of the early GCA laws? Finally got tossed out because it was nearly impossible to enforce?

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Union, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,256

    Post imported post

    sv_libertarian wrote:
    Didn't there used to be some sort of ammo registration requirments with one of the early GCA laws? Finally got tossed out because it was nearly impossible to enforce?
    The Peoples Republic of Kalifornia passed this legislation even after being advise by their own people who investigated if it could be done, that the technology did not exist to do this at this time. So law makers don't carry about facts of even if it is feasible, just so they can claim they did something.

  20. #20
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Olympia, WA, ,
    Posts
    3,201

    Post imported post

    PRK passed a microstamping bill...

    I was trying to remember something I read that was associated with the GCA of 1968 or whatever the one was that happened after JFK got shot. Something that required record keeping on all ammo sales...

    Hawaii and one other state (I can't recall which one) also have introduced serialization bills. Kalifornia looked at serialization but even they gave it up. But then they passed that microstamping BS...

  21. #21
    Regular Member John Hardin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Snohomish, Washington, USA
    Posts
    684

    Post imported post

    sv_libertarian wrote:
    Hawaii and one other state (I can't recall which one) also have introduced serialization bills.
    Mississississippippi has, see the link I posted. According to NRA-ILA, Tennessee has too. Google got an Illinois hit.

    I think I saw somewhere that about six states have just done this, so it seems to be a coordinated effort.

    Don't forget, this will probably lie quietly in its coffin, to again rise from the dead and terrorize peaceful citizens at the opening of the next legislative session. Sharpen your pitchforks and stakes.

    Related:

    http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Read.aspx?ID=3423

    http://www.nraila.org/Issues/FactSheets/Read.aspx?ID=227

    http://www.nraila.org/Issues/FactShe...&issue=005

    http://www.isra.org/legislation/

    Looks like Hawaii's bill is dead (or perhaps undead) too:

    http://www.nssf.org/BP/current/
    ALOHA (GOODBYE) BULLET SERIALIZATION BILL . . . Hawaii legislation HB 2392, which would have banned ammunition by mandating bullet serialization, the process by which each individual round of ammunition is identified and marked with a laser-engraved serial number, was "deferred indefinitely" following strong opposition from sportsmen, gun-owners and firearms enthusiasts.
    Gargle:

    http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q...alization+bill

  22. #22
    Regular Member Machoduck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Covington, WA & Keenesburg, CO
    Posts
    566

    Post imported post

    CT and PA, too, per the latest NRA-ILA update.

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Lynnwood, WA, ,
    Posts
    1,487

    Post imported post

    But this new legislation will protect us from criminals. What's wrong with that? Is it not worth the extra 300% cost of ammo to make it so that criminals can be caught? This seems flawless to me.

    We should have government sanctioned healthcare and a cubic inch tax on vehicles too.

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Everett, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,339

    Post imported post

    I like how they actually define "Pistol Ammunition" and that it included bullets for use in hand loading or reloading.

    What the hell are they going to do about frangible rounds? There is no way to keep them from disintegrating unless they hit tissue.

    I don't know about you guys but I am going to be in the market for a rifle round pistol or a .410 pistol if this passes.
    "A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity."

    "though I walk through the valley in the shadow of death, I fear no evil, for I know that you are by my side" Glock 23:40

  25. #25
    Regular Member Decoligny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Rosamond, California, USA
    Posts
    1,865

    Post imported post

    Bear 45/70 wrote:
    sv_libertarian wrote:
    Didn't there used to be some sort of ammo registration requirments with one of the early GCA laws? Finally got tossed out because it was nearly impossible to enforce?
    The Peoples Republic of Kalifornia passed this legislation even after being advise by their own people who investigated if it could be done, that the technology did not exist to do this at this time. So law makers don't carry about facts of even if it is feasible, just so they can claim they did something.
    http://www.answers.com/topic/firearm-microstamping

    Arnold signed legislation that is nowhere near as intrusive as this. All handguns manufactured or sold in CA after a certain date have to have a firing pin that microstamps the brass with the guns serial number. This makes the guns more expensive, but you can still get any ammo you want at the normal cost and you can still reload. It is a useless law that can be skirted by criminals just by buying a new firing pin from another state, or just by using a revolver, no brass left at the crime scene, no numbers to match.

    With this new "encoded" ammuntion, the bullet has to have a number on the bottom, and the shell casing has to have the same number engraved inside it. These numbers are registered in a database along with all your personal information when you buy the ammo. You are required to get rid of any "unencoded" ammo by a certain date. You are not allowed to be in possession of any "unencoded" ammo. Reloaders will be SOL. You will not be able to buy ammo from another state that doesn't have "encoded" ammo. If someone steals your ammo, then shoots someone, they will come looking for you, cause your name is tied to the bullet they just removed from some dead guys chest.

    Write to your legislators now.

    Call your legilators now.

    E-mail your legislators now.






Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •